Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Taxes are, if not a driver, at least a critical factor for investors, when investing abroad. Sovereign Wealth Funds are not different from other investors in this respect. That notwithstanding, unlike operators, scholars have hardly paid attention to the 'SWFs' tax exemption factor'. Thus, there is still room for investigation and research. Some States exempt SWFs from paying taxes, according to a common practice and generally accepted principle that one government does not tax another. Scholars usually focus on US law and regulations, providing for a general tax exemption, but State practice is wide ranging, from exemptions applied to both commercial and non-commercial transactions, to both portfolio investments and FDI (UK), to exemptions limited to non-commercial investments (Canada) or to passive, portfolio investments (Australia); again, from a dual system, where exemption is granted by law to portfolio investments, and by the ministry of finance to FDI (France), to a general exclusion of exemption (Germany, Switzerland, Poland, Norway). A comparative analysis of both treatment and grounds for tax exemption applying to SWFs is carried out in Chapter 8. The existence of a direct or indirect relationship between tax exemption and State immunity (from jurisdiction) has been investigated as well. At a first glance, the two elements seem strictly and directly connected indeed, while the States’ practice reveals more graduated shadings: there is not always a relationship between a partial or total tax exemption and a relative or absolute immunity granted by host States. Further questions arise from subjective features: whether a tax exemption applies both to SWFs and to State-owned entities (SOEs) is still a disputed matter. In theory, host States should grant a tax exemption to SWFs more than to SOEs, as the former are State investors, and the latter are companies operating abroad and subject to host-State company law, regardless of their owner. On the contrary, the common practice is quite surprising. The practice adopted by States when it comes to the taxation of SWF investments may fall into one of the following three main groups. The first one consists of States whose national laws grant tax exemption to sovereign investments based on the accepted belief that they are implementing a general principle of international law: par in parem iudicium non habet. In this first group, tax exemption is seldom absolute, while more often it depends on the nature of the business. In the second group we find those States where limited or absolute tax exemption is granted under a bilateral investment treaty, usually on a reciprocity basis. The last group is that of States that do not grant any tax exemption to foreign investments, either relative or absolute, under any condition.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».